United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ERWIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for
judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of
the Social Security Administration (SSA) denying
Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits
(DIB) under the Social Security Act. The Commissioner has
answered and filed a transcript of the administrative record
(hereinafter TR.___). The parties have consented to
jurisdiction over this matter by a United States magistrate
judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
parties have briefed their positions, and the matter is now
at issue. Based on the Court's review of the record and
the issues presented, the Court REVERSES AND
REMANDS the Commissioner's decision.
filed her application for DIB on April 21, 2011, alleging a
disability beginning January 5, 2011. (TR. 37). Initially and
on reconsideration, the Social Security Administration denied
Plaintiff's application for benefits. Following an
administrative hearing, (TR. 54-94), an Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) issued an unfavorable decision. (TR. 37-48). The
Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review.
(TR. 1-3). Thus, the decision of the ALJ became the final
decision of the Commissioner.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
followed the five-step sequential evaluation process required
by agency regulations. See Fischer-Ross v. Barnhart,
431 F.3d 729, 731 (10th Cir. 2005); 20 C.F.R. §404.1520.
At step one, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff had not
engaged in substantial gainful activity since January 5,
2011, her alleged disability onset date. (TR. 39). At step
two, the ALJ determined Ms. Jackson had the following severe
impairments: obesity; arthritis in both knees; and left foot
stress fracture. (TR. 39). At step three, the ALJ found that
Plaintiff's impairments do not meet or medically equal
any of the presumptively disabling impairments listed at 20
C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (TR. 44).
four, the ALJ assessed Ms. Jackson's residual functional
After careful consideration of the entire record, the
undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual
functional capacity to perform a range of sedentary work as
defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(a). The claimant can
lift/carry/push/pull less than 10 pounds frequently and 10
pounds occasionally; sit 6 hours in an [8-hour] work day;
stand/walk about 2 hours in an [8-hour] work day; and
occasionally climb stairs and ramps and stoop but never climb
ladders, ropes or scaffolds, balance, kneel, crouch, or
(TR. 44). With this RFC, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was
not capable of performing her past relevant work as a
janitor, receptionist or sales representative. (TR. 46-47).
five, however, the ALJ relied on the testimony of a
vocational expert (VE) who testified that Ms. Jackson had
retained some transferable skills from her past relevant work
including using a cash register to make change; minor record
keeping; exchange of information and intake of information.
(TR. 88). The VE also testified that Ms. Jackson could
perform other jobs existing in significant numbers in the
regional and national economies including Credit Card Clerk;
Check Cashier; Sorter; Order Clerk of Food and Beverage; Call
Out Operator; and Final Assembler of Optical Goods-all
sedentary semi-skilled or unskilled jobs. (TR. 47-48). The
ALJ determined the VE's description of these jobs was
consistent with the information in the Dictionary of
Occupational Titles and determined Ms. Jackson had not been
disabled, within the meaning of the Social Security Act, at
any time from the alleged onset date through the date of the
unfavorable decision. (TR. 48).
appeal, Ms. Jackson alleges the ALJ committed legal error in
that: (1) the RFC determination is not supported by
substantial evidence in the record because the ALJ considered
only the portions of medical opinions that supported her RFC
determination; and (2) the ALJ erred in assessing Ms.